Ikkyu wrote:Also, are we now deciding that only enlightened beings are allowed to indulge in intoxicants? That's news to me. Please elaborate.

Everybody is allowed to engage in intoxicants but it seems that only those that have a degree of control over their mind can effectively deal with them. Do you have a degree of control over your three doors that allows you to avoid negative outcomes when your already befuddled brain is further clouded? If so, go for it. If not, stop looking for excuses. You want to take intoxicants? Take them. By all means! But taking intoxicants will not make you Soen Roshi, Tao Chi or (here's a new one for you, you'll love this one) Drukpa Kunley. It was not the imbibing of intoxicants that made them worthy of praise (otherwise all junkies would be worthy of praise) it was the mental qualities they had developed that allowed them to indulge in intoxicants without setting themselves up for lower rebirths.

Have you developed those qualities to that extent? NO! So will your actions have consequences? YES! Are you willing to undergo the consequences of your actions? Yes or no?

You can't have your cake and eat it. Make a choice and get on with it.

It's a dopey thread because you have yet to see the meaning behind the quotes you post and fail to accept the logic behind the rebuttals to your position that everybody has posted. You are not engaging in a debate, you are merely restating your point over and over again. A point that was taken apart on the first page.

You are free to take intoxicants, but they will generally have negative effects on your mind. It is that simple. Do you understand? PS "Soen was viewed as an unorthodox, eccentric and controversial teacher within conventional Rinzai circles of his day." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soen_Nakagawa

Sex, alchohol/drugs, adrenaline thrills, exercise high, gamer/internet addiction, the high of combat/fighting, happiness highs ... Ikkyu, your post brought me out of lurker status, because I could relate to some of these.

The common element is trying to get a momentary hit of the internal chemical high and clarity of a moment in time, or of connectedness which is another type of high. Unfortunately, these activities are followed by getting lost in the activity, in the numbing buzz, or in other baggage that each can bring. The little I've been able to read about Ikkyu, it sounds like he was a very insightful person who was able to retain his out of control moments for what he would write, but that he also had the baggage or extreme swings to go with it. For example:"When I was 47 everybody came to see me so I walked out forever." "the vagaries of life though painful teach us""why is it all so beautiful this fake dream this craziness"Rather than focusing on the 5 Precepts, think of each of these in terms of the 8-Fold Path of the Dharma. There is no "rightness" or compassion (internal or external) and so Ikkyu Soen's attitude was a major failure to me.

As I see it, Buddhist practice is to realize what a moment is. What is not the fake dream or painful vagaries. Then extending the moment and clarity, typically (not always) through meditation. Buddhist practice can provide the clarity without the chemical buzz or ego/emotional baggage. Versus alcohol & drugs being all about the numbing of one self, even though there initially seems to be a clarity.

Casual sex because it feels good is just another drug and even more powerful, because you get both the chemical high and release when you come and the emotional chemical hit that comes when you romantically hope that maybe another person relates to you. Followed by the reality crash need for more. In other words it's another diversion. Greg and others have stuck with you in this thread and given great advice, which you seem to try not not to internalize or understand. It sounds like you just want to argue, which is just another form of needing external acknowledgement for an arguing person's ego. That's a close relation to the endorphin hit that comes with the hope and "look at me" of a new romance.

The need for the chemical (internal or external) high and numbness is you robbing yourself of your "moments." So many of us in western society "just want to be happy," which was just what you stated.

My bottom line is that I would rather have some understanding and be content. Only as a result, this practice has made me realize that I am happier with myself and life, than constantly needing external "happiness highs."

Your posts sound like a person who seeks outside of himself for justification, just like any other recreational junky.

Okay, first, I did do some scrounging around the forums for the answer I was seeking, but to no avail. In my view, anything that brings us away from the here and now is an intoxicant. I am not an alcohol drinker, but if I were to drink and be constantly aware of myself, my body, my actions, and my surroundings, would I have been intoxicated during this time? I think not, but I'm not certain.

Just to be clear, I am not trying to advocate drug use, I feel that focusing on the future could also be considered an intoxicant. It seems like its the cycle of want-receive addiction that is trying to be avoided by the fifth precept, not truly the banishment of drinking.

This is where it starts to get tricky, because I'm going to bring cannabis into this discussion, too. I firmly believe that this plant IS medicine. It has the ability not just to manage pain, but to heal in many cases. I don't generally believe that smoking is medicinal except perhaps in the case of those with stomach issues who seem unable to find an appetite or digest food without. I think that the mechanism in which "pot makes the user more able to cope with reality" is ruined when the cycle of want-receive is in place because it becomes "without pot, I can't handle reality."

Now a truly insightful person might see what marijuana showed them to make life more bearable and apply that to their entire life sans the pot. Or they might, I don't know, see smoking as a blessing and become an addict.

The point I may be meandering around is probably sickness. Is this just suffering? Impermanent ailments of the body? Are we all sick? Is the Dharma the only tool we should use to heal ourselves? I kind of think that's rubbish. Not to say I don't believe with the right mindfulness, concentration, and meditation we aren't capable of healing, because I do absolutely believe that is true. But should all sickness be treated in this way? I mean, if I broke my leg, I don't think I would try to heal it with meditation. I think I would go to the doctor so they can straighten everything up and put a brace on so the bone could heal properly. But I wouldn't take their Oxy.

I think it takes a very wise man to know the difference between medicine and intoxicants. Please contribute, I'd love to hear everyone's opinions!

if you use a substance as medicine, then it is medicine. If you use it to get high, then it is an intoxicant.You have to use wisdom to know the difference.If a medicine that cures pain or some ill condition also gets you high, then you might need to reduce the dosageand you have to be very mindful about what is going on.many prescription medicines end up becoming addictions.when i took 5 precepts my teacher explained how taking medicine that had alcohol in it isn't breaking the vow not to use intoxicants.Would you like me to elaborate on what he said?

Academic discussions are supposed to cite sources, or so i understand.My apologies for not being able to cite anything at this time....

Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth. Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.

Oh, I'm sorry. It appears I've then posted this in the wrong section. This may be more of a philosophical discussion then. Perhaps a moderator would be so kind as to move it for us...

What exactly do you mean when you say get 'high'? Do you mean not observing self and reality or distracting us? Obviously ingesting any substance alters our reality; as we absorb it it alters us. I'm pretty sure eating my morning oatmeal gets me high in some form... What if when I smoke my intention is to better myself, to open my mind, to increase my compassion and decrease my attachments?

Zealot wrote: In my view, anything that brings us away from the here and now is an intoxicant.

That is a reasonable view, but it is not what the vow to refrain from intoxicants is concerned with. The precept to refrain from intoxicants is for more practical reasons, because people--perhaps not all people--are often more likely to break the other precepts when they are intoxicated. This is how it was explained to me by my lama. There may not be any statistics to back up this claim, but that's where it lies. So, you could be totally aware, as you say, and be totally aware that you are breaking the four preceding precepts.

Zealot wrote: I feel that focusing on the future could also be considered an intoxicant. It seems like its the cycle of want-receive addiction that is trying to be avoided by the fifth precept, not truly the banishment of drinking.

One can certainly get hooked on dreaming about the future or dwelling on the past and not be focused on the here and now. But it is not considered an intoxicant. Interesting, though, that you should mention drinking and breaking the cycle of addiction. I took the precept against intoxicants from my lama specifically because I thought it would help me to stop drinking, and craving alcohol, as nothing else helped. And it did. Immediately. That was about 20 years ago. I have tasted alcohol since then but i now find it unpleasant. I have no desire to drink it anymore than i would want to drink soured milk. (just an interesting bit of trivia, from personal experience, to add to this topic).

Zealot wrote:This is where it starts to get tricky, because I'm going to bring cannabis into this discussion, too. I firmly believe that this plant IS medicine. It has the ability not just to manage pain, but to heal in many cases. I don't generally believe that smoking is medicinal except perhaps in the case of those with stomach issues who seem unable to find an appetite or digest food without. I think that the mechanism in which "pot makes the user more able to cope with reality" is ruined when the cycle of want-receive is in place because it becomes "without pot, I can't handle reality."

Yes, that's tricky....i have no idea what you are saying.

Zealot wrote:Now a truly insightful person might see what marijuana showed them to make life more bearable and apply that to their entire life sans the pot. Or they might, I don't know, see smoking as a blessing and become an addict.

Well, you can't say that marijuana isn't the scenic route. I think I constantly had plenty of THC (the stuff in pot that gets you high) in my body from the time I was 17 until I was around 33. It makes your blood vessels expand, so not only do you get red eyes, but a lot more blood rushing to your brain. I gave it up shortly after I quit drinking. Yes, I think some substances make you see the world a different way than you did before, and that experience stays with you.

Zealot wrote:The point I may be meandering around is probably sickness. Is this just suffering? Impermanent ailments of the body? Are we all sick? Is the Dharma the only tool we should use to heal ourselves?

if you say samsara is "sickness" to me that's too much like the christian idea of 'original sin' It also reminds me of a Star Trek TNG episode where a planet of people thought they needed some kind of drug to keep them healthy but it turned out they were all just hooked on it and what they thought was illness was actually withdrawal. Ennyhow...No, it isn't sickness. All beings are striving to be free from striving. Ironic! And yes, the BuddhaDharma is the only medicine based on that diagnosis of the human condition. There are lots of meds for all kinds of stuff that will heal this and that. Politics, religion, money, power, drugs, whatever. make you feel real good. But BuddhaDharma is the only one that treats the cause and not just the symptoms.

Zealot wrote:What exactly do you mean when you say get 'high'?

You have to ask???Getting high is just another aspect of confused mind. I'm not saying people should or shouldn't. But it's like food coloring in water. You can make water any color you want, but it's still water. It doesn't really change the water. You can get high or not, but that has nothing to do with opening your mind, letting go of attachments or being compassionate. It's still the same mind. The only difference is that its, like um.....he he he ....ummm... wow, man, what was um...hey, you got anything to eat??

No, I have to disagree with you here. I used to start every day with a bowl of that other stuff. These days, as a matter of fact, it IS oatmeal. Two totally different things. Or maybe there is something different about your oatmeal??? Is that why the Quaker guy on the box has that weird smile?...

Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth. Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.

Zealot wrote:Okay, first, I did do some scrounging around the forums for the answer I was seeking, but to no avail. In my view, anything that brings us away from the here and now is an intoxicant. I am not an alcohol drinker, but if I were to drink and be constantly aware of myself, my body, my actions, and my surroundings, would I have been intoxicated during this time? I think not, but I'm not certain.

Just to be clear, I am not trying to advocate drug use, I feel that focusing on the future could also be considered an intoxicant. It seems like its the cycle of want-receive addiction that is trying to be avoided by the fifth precept, not truly the banishment of drinking.

This is where it starts to get tricky, because I'm going to bring cannabis into this discussion, too. I firmly believe that this plant IS medicine. It has the ability not just to manage pain, but to heal in many cases. I don't generally believe that smoking is medicinal except perhaps in the case of those with stomach issues who seem unable to find an appetite or digest food without. I think that the mechanism in which "pot makes the user more able to cope with reality" is ruined when the cycle of want-receive is in place because it becomes "without pot, I can't handle reality."

Now a truly insightful person might see what marijuana showed them to make life more bearable and apply that to their entire life sans the pot. Or they might, I don't know, see smoking as a blessing and become an addict.

The point I may be meandering around is probably sickness. Is this just suffering? Impermanent ailments of the body? Are we all sick? Is the Dharma the only tool we should use to heal ourselves? I kind of think that's rubbish. Not to say I don't believe with the right mindfulness, concentration, and meditation we aren't capable of healing, because I do absolutely believe that is true. But should all sickness be treated in this way? I mean, if I broke my leg, I don't think I would try to heal it with meditation. I think I would go to the doctor so they can straighten everything up and put a brace on so the bone could heal properly. But I wouldn't take their Oxy.

I think it takes a very wise man to know the difference between medicine and intoxicants. Please contribute, I'd love to hear everyone's opinions!

Buddha made the fifth percept not as a rule but as a guideline, it depends on the reason for why ur using the drug, if its for good intentions then its good, and whats good is happiness

Its very interesting that you bring intoxicant use up , because i was wondering the same thing, whether or not i should use cannibis because i could be breaking the fifth percept, but then i realized it doesn't matter, all that matters is happiness

Existence can be normal.Ex:a Apple tree is a apple treeEx:Michael is Michael, Michael is who Michael is

Existence can be conditioned. Ex: Apple tree is apple tree if apple tree growsEx: Michael is Michael if Michael is a kingEx: Michael is Michael if Michael is walkingEx: Michael is Michael if Michael is not walking

Existence can be unconditionedEx: Apple is apple tree once apple tree is grown for 50 weeksEx: Michael is Michael once Michael is a kingEx: Michael is content Michael once Michael is walkingEx: Michael is discontent Michael once Michael is walking.

The sutras are clear in that anything that causes heedlessness is an intoxicant (unless used for medication). Therefore cannibis is an intoxicant. The Buddha never said anything that makes you happy is ok.

Zealot wrote:I think it takes a very wise man to know the difference between medicine and intoxicants.:

Obviously, the intended use of the substance is what differentiates between the two. Medicine is usually taken to heal the body (and sometimes the mind), however so many people kid themselves into thinking they are taking a substance for it's health benefits, when in actual fact they are using it to become intoxicated.

Seishin wrote:The sutras are clear in that anything that causes heedlessness is an intoxicant (unless used for medication). Therefore cannibis is an intoxicant. The Buddha never said anything that makes you happy is ok.

Gassho,Seishin

This is a very good definition. By it, violent entertainment is an intoxicant. Most spectacle, really. It doesn't need to be something you physically ingest. The Brahma Net Sutra is particularly interesting on this point.

Need help getting on retreat? Want to support others in practice? Pay the Dana for Dharma forum a visit...

Zealot wrote:I think it takes a very wise man to know the difference between medicine and intoxicants.:

Obviously, the intended use of the substance is what differentiates between the two. Medicine is usually taken to heal the body (and sometimes the mind), however so many people kid themselves into thinking they are taking a substance for it's health benefits, when in actual fact they are using it to become intoxicated.

Gassho,Seishin

After a certain level of understanding, your the happiness is unbreakable and the cannabis will not cause loss of mindfulness,

Existence can be normal.Ex:a Apple tree is a apple treeEx:Michael is Michael, Michael is who Michael is

Existence can be conditioned. Ex: Apple tree is apple tree if apple tree growsEx: Michael is Michael if Michael is a kingEx: Michael is Michael if Michael is walkingEx: Michael is Michael if Michael is not walking

Existence can be unconditionedEx: Apple is apple tree once apple tree is grown for 50 weeksEx: Michael is Michael once Michael is a kingEx: Michael is content Michael once Michael is walkingEx: Michael is discontent Michael once Michael is walking.

Zealot wrote:This is where it starts to get tricky, because I'm going to bring cannabis into this discussion, too. I firmly believe that this plant IS medicine. It has the ability not just to manage pain, but to heal in many cases. I don't generally believe that smoking is medicinal except perhaps in the case of those with stomach issues who seem unable to find an appetite or digest food without. I think that the mechanism in which "pot makes the user more able to cope with reality" is ruined when the cycle of want-receive is in place because it becomes "without pot, I can't handle reality."

Yes, that's tricky....i have no idea what you are saying.

That's what an addiction is, isn't it? Because you can't deal with the things in front of you, you have to resort to a substance to make reality more bearable.

PadmaVonSamba wrote:

Zealot wrote:The point I may be meandering around is probably sickness. Is this just suffering? Impermanent ailments of the body? Are we all sick? Is the Dharma the only tool we should use to heal ourselves?

if you say samsara is "sickness" to me that's too much like the christian idea of 'original sin' It also reminds me of a Star Trek TNG episode where a planet of people thought they needed some kind of drug to keep them healthy but it turned out they were all just hooked on it and what they thought was illness was actually withdrawal. Ennyhow...No, it isn't sickness. All beings are striving to be free from striving. Ironic! And yes, the BuddhaDharma is the only medicine based on that diagnosis of the human condition. There are lots of meds for all kinds of stuff that will heal this and that. Politics, religion, money, power, drugs, whatever. make you feel real good. But BuddhaDharma is the only one that treats the cause and not just the symptoms.

I would have to disagree with your views. The first noble truth states that life is suffering. In addition, I think your view that the Dharma is the only tool to heal the human condition is incorrect. That's like saying that there's only one way to achieve enlightenment. Every path is different, and none of it truly exist. Buddha constantly says that the Dharma is not real, it is just a un-truth with a much higher propensity to leading us to the truth.

PadmaVonSamba wrote:

Zealot wrote:What exactly do you mean when you say get 'high'?

You have to ask???Getting high is just another aspect of confused mind. I'm not saying people should or shouldn't. But it's like food coloring in water. You can make water any color you want, but it's still water. It doesn't really change the water. You can get high or not, but that has nothing to do with opening your mind, letting go of attachments or being compassionate. It's still the same mind. The only difference is that its, like um.....he he he ....ummm... wow, man, what was um...hey, you got anything to eat??

No, I have to disagree with you here. I used to start every day with a bowl of that other stuff. These days, as a matter of fact, it IS oatmeal. Two totally different things. Or maybe there is something different about your oatmeal??? Is that why the Quaker guy on the box has that weird smile?

Yes, I do have to ask. Everything we do alters our perception of reality and ourselves. I could dig up a quote from somewhere, but in essence, our brain and body are full of chemical receptors that react to any and every stimuli making us 'high' off of something, be it endorphins, THC, serotonin, protein, sugar, or well, anything. So what's the difference between a bowl of oatmeal or a bowl of my favorite cannabis?

xtracorrupt wrote:Buddha made the fifth percept not as a rule but as a guideline, it depends on the reason for why ur using the drug, if its for good intentions then its good, and whats good is happiness

Its very interesting that you bring intoxicant use up , because i was wondering the same thing, whether or not i should use cannibis because i could be breaking the fifth percept, but then i realized it doesn't matter, all that matters is happiness

Happiness is important, but I think a compassionate, detached view is what we're supposed to be striving for. Attachment to cannabis or any other intoxicant is my current view of what the fifth precept was meant to avoid.

Seishin wrote:The sutras are clear in that anything that causes heedlessness is an intoxicant (unless used for medication). Therefore cannibis is an intoxicant. The Buddha never said anything that makes you happy is ok.

Gassho,Seishin

Are you certain that cannabis causes heedlessness? In my current state, my cat distracting me causes me to be heedless of my body and breathing; is She an intoxicant? I would say heedlessness is caused by the person but brought on by the substance.

Jikan wrote:

Seishin wrote:The sutras are clear in that anything that causes heedlessness is an intoxicant (unless used for medication). Therefore cannibis is an intoxicant. The Buddha never said anything that makes you happy is ok.

Gassho,Seishin

This is a very good definition. By it, violent entertainment is an intoxicant. Most spectacle, really. It doesn't need to be something you physically ingest. The Brahma Net Sutra is particularly interesting on this point.

xtracorrupt wrote:After a certain level of understanding, your the happiness is unbreakable and the cannabis will not cause loss of mindfulness,

Then cannabis would serve no purpose after that point, besides it doesn't change the fact that it is an intoxicant and my point above still stands.

Gassho,Seishin.

A purpose is empty, and there are no facts. Just what we cling to. What if through cannabis I can lead others toward the path to enlightenment?

lobster wrote:As you probably know pain, for example sitting in a full Lotus that is uncomfortable will produce intoxicating endomorphins. Certain chanting practices and music will produce mild euphoria.

So it is hard enough developing clarity without further narcotics complicating things.

Nothing is hard; nothing is easy. It all just is.

Thank you for all of the replies, the volume was pleasantly unexpected!

Last edited by Zealot on Mon Oct 29, 2012 5:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Zealot wrote:A purpose is empty, and there are no facts. Just what we cling to. What if through cannabis I can lead others toward the path to enlightenment?

Others have tried and failed with this view. There are many members on here who have experimented with drugs and came to realise that they cause more illusion, not free us from it, which is the point of Buddhism.

Zealot wrote:Are you certain that cannabis causes heedlessness? In my current state, my cat distracting me causes me to be heedless of my body and breathing; is She an intoxicant? I would say heedlessness is caused by the person but brought on by the substance.

Cannabis is an intoxicant. A cat is not. If a cat causes you to be heedless that says more about your mind than it does the cat. This is the human condition and is called the monkey mind. We all have it, but taking intoxicants no matter how good they make you feel or how clear you think things become will actually make things worse.

Zealot wrote:Yes, I do have to ask. Everything we do alters our perception of reality and ourselves. I could dig up a quote from somewhere, but in essence, our brain and body are full of chemical receptors that react to any and every stimuli making us 'high' off of something, be it endorphins, THC, serotonin, protein, sugar, or well, anything. So what's the difference between a bowl of oatmeal or a bowl of my favorite cannabis?

Your body does not get high from oatmeal, that's just silly. Try replacing oatmeal with cannabis and see what it does to your body and mind.

Zealot wrote:A purpose is empty, and there are no facts. Just what we cling to. What if through cannabis I can lead others toward the path to enlightenment?

Others have tried and failed with this view. There are many members on here who have experimented with drugs and came to realise that they cause more illusion, not free us from it, which is the point of Buddhism.

So there is a universal truth in which cannabis causes more illusions and cannot possibly help free us from any of them? It seems like you're biased, friend

Seishin wrote:

Zealot wrote:Are you certain that cannabis causes heedlessness? In my current state, my cat distracting me causes me to be heedless of my body and breathing; is She an intoxicant? I would say heedlessness is caused by the person but brought on by the substance.

Cannabis is an intoxicant. A cat is not. If a cat causes you to be heedless that says more about your mind than it does the cat. This is the human condition and is called the monkey mind. We all have it, but taking intoxicants no matter how good they make you feel or how clear you think things become will actually make things worse.

That would be the point I'm making. And untrained monkey brain is heedless. A trained brain that is not heedless is probably not heedless regardless of the cannabis consumption.

Seishin wrote:

Zealot wrote:Yes, I do have to ask. Everything we do alters our perception of reality and ourselves. I could dig up a quote from somewhere, but in essence, our brain and body are full of chemical receptors that react to any and every stimuli making us 'high' off of something, be it endorphins, THC, serotonin, protein, sugar, or well, anything. So what's the difference between a bowl of oatmeal or a bowl of my favorite cannabis?

Your body does not get high from oatmeal, that's just silly. Try replacing oatmeal with cannabis and see what it does to your body and mind.

What is getting high? I've yet to receive an answer to that question, or at least one I can accept. I don't think it's silly. They're both things. Yes, if I didn't do one, I'd probably wither away from malnutrition and nothing would happen if I stopped the other. But is this truth universal, or are you just biased?

Zealot wrote:So there is a universal truth in which cannabis causes more illusions and cannot possibly help free us from any of them?

According to the Buddha and countless Dharma masters

Zealot wrote:It seems like you're biased, friend

I would say you are biased.

Zealot wrote:That would be the point I'm making. And untrained monkey brain is heedless. A trained brain that is not heedless is probably not heedless regardless of the cannabis consumption.

1) If you were enlightened then I doubt cannabis would have an effect, so it would be completely pointless taking it. 2) Cannabis does not lead to enlightenment so there is no point it taking it

Zealot wrote:I've yet to receive an answer to that question, or at least one I can accept.

THAT is the problem, which is why this conversation is going in circles.

Zealot wrote:I don't think it's silly. They're both things. Yes, if I didn't do one, I'd probably wither away from malnutrition and nothing would happen if I stopped the other. But is this truth universal, or are you just biased?

You wouldn't wither from malnutrition, the chemicals in the cannabis would have a overwhelmingly negative effect on your body and mind that would be either severe or permanent.

It is obvious you are not here to get answers to questions but rather try to prove your idea that cannabis will help towards enlightenment. I think this might be in breach of DW terms and conditions...

Along the Path, any thought, word, or deed that doesn't further the progress of the Aspirant is a distraction, an intoxicant.When there is no Path, there is no distraction, no intoxicants. None are necessary, and none will distract.